Why Is It Okay To Hate Openly Gay People?

[Cielingcat]

Shadzar, why is it that your story is the exact same as the story of everyone else who shares your opinion?

I mean really, how is it that everyone on the internet knows a whole group of people who literally go around everywhere shouting about how gay they are at the top of their lungs?

I spend a lot of time hanging around gay people, and I have never encountered or even heard of one of these people.

Seriously, this seems a phenomenon wholly unique to people who hate gay people.

You know what that tells me? It tells me that you lot are fucking liars. Because all of you have the same exact story, which no one outside your little group of "gays should stay in the closet!" supporters ever reports.

[Kaelik]

Roy:

The military is the one place in the fucking universe it should be fucking mandatory for all your coworkers to know all about your significant other.

You are on tour for a time between 6 months and 4 fucking years without seeing that person. You deserve the opportunity to talk about him/her whenever the fuck you want to anyone you damn well please. You literally sleep in the same room with the same 39 guys for weeks at a time when you aren't literally saving each others lives.

If those fuckers don't know about your significant other, and you don't know about theirs, then you aren't fucking human, you are a fucking robot.

And it's not just your friends and equals that literally can't know in don't ask don't tell. If your fucking mail carrier ever finds out, you get kicked out. That's not an issue of being unprofessional, that's you getting fucking mail that is often pre-screened.

In conclusion: Fuck you Roy.

[Draco_Argentum]

Ballbag, Kaelik beat me to it.

You're a real douche, Roy. Keep that whole 'poor persecuted Roy' thing going please. Its amusing to watch you pretend that we're calling you an arsehole cause we're meanies. It couldn't possibly be that soldiers tend to talk about themselves when they're stuck in some shit country getting shot at for months at a time. That couldn't be normal at all.

[RiotGearEpsilon]

Look, I'm well aware that the ostentatiously homosexual can be just as annoying as the ostentatiously heterosexual (you know who I'm talking about) but 'I have a boyfriend back home and I miss him' is not ostentatious by any standard, let alone the 'christ I have been stuck on deployment for a year now and I am so alone' standard.

[shadzar]

Shadzar, why is it that your story is the exact same as the story of everyone else who shares your opinion?

I mean really, how is it that everyone on the internet knows a whole group of people who literally go around everywhere shouting about how gay they are at the top of their lungs?

I spend a lot of time hanging around gay people, and I have never encountered or even heard of one of these people.

Seriously, this seems a phenomenon wholly unique to people who hate gay people.

You know what that tells me? It tells me that you lot are fucking liars. Because all of you have the same exact story, which no one outside your little group of "gays should stay in the closet!" supporters ever reports.

So it really just boils down to because you have never seen it it doesn't exist?

I forget what video it was from the news, but there was a group on it last year that was the same way. It was a gay club that a fight broke out at because a few people were outside and doing just that to irritate others...straights I think. But some of the clubs regular said they wouldn't be going back because the group that started the fight went overboard.

I don't like anyone that comes into a room and has to be the center of attention, and if you think gays cannot be attention whores, then you are sadly mistaken.

I dont know where you are from, nor care, but just because these people aren't in your area, doesn't mean they don't exist. And it is really funny that you mention it to be a view from people that hate gays, when the ones around me that mention it most and how they hate some for being that way ARE gay.

You just look for the negative from straights apparently, and neglect that there is a problem. Gay isn't the problem, but the attitude some have on boths sides is.

[violence in the media]

The issue here isn't the gayness, but the obnoxiousness of the behavior. However, would you be as annoyed with a straight person behaving in a similar manner? Would you even notice? How is a loud, raucous group of gays fundamentally different from a similarly behaviored group of frat boys? Soccer moms? Sports hooligans? Do you run around saying things like, "those frat boy assholes need to tone it down. They give college students a bad name, and my college student friends agree." Do you bitch about it on internet forums with the same intensity you reserve for flamboyant gays? Seriously, if the beef is with the behavior, then you need to stop fixating on the sexual orientation.

[shadzar]

The issue here isn't the gayness, but the obnoxiousness of the behavior. However, would you be as annoyed with a straight person behaving in a similar manner? Would you even notice? How is a loud, raucous group of gays fundamentally different from a similarly behaviored group of frat boys? Soccer moms? Sports hooligans? Do you run around saying things like, "those frat boy assholes need to tone it down. They give college students a bad name, and my college student friends agree." Do you bitch about it on internet forums with the same intensity you reserve for flamboyant gays? Seriously, if the beef is with the behavior, then you need to stop fixating on the sexual orientation.

If you are asking me, then no because I avoid the attention whore's websites. I don't go to sites that have soccer moms, or pageant moms, or loud drunkards, etc.

They can be found everywhere and bleed into any type of website discussion, but you can weed them out, and the text isn't as much a problem as someone coming into a room and offending your ears.

It is like the initial example of people having sex on the table next to you at a restaurant. Those attention whores, or obnoxious people exist for all facets of life...

So there hasn't come up a discussion of the frat boys, soccer moms etc anywhere I have been, and this is the first on a forum where gay has come up in such a manner, to say that there aren't any obnoxious gays. Wherein the fact lies that they are, and like anything else they add to conflict, and the issue many have with "gay" as a hot topic or controversial issue, makes them worse for the case to keep causing problems.

[Cielingcat]

So your argument is "gay people are attention whores, they should all stop doing that because it makes me hate all gay people, but when straight people are attention whores I ignore them"?

Seriously, shut the fuck up. This isn't an issue of sexual orientation. This is an issue of you hating gay people, and wanting to find a reason to support that hate. And then you claim that it's not you who hates them, it's your gay friends (who apparently include this group of people you hate, by your own admission).

I have known some attention whores. Some of them were gay. But never, outside of homophobic internet anecdotes, have I heard of people going into a room and screaming "I'M GAY! LOOK AT ME I'M GAY!" as loud as they can.

[Juton]

As vexing as shadzar is, is this the proper response in a thread talking about people being persecuted for their orientation?

[Maxus]

Difficult call, there.

Hypothetically, yes.

If Shadzar went and sucked enough cocks to fill a barrel, he may make someone's day a little brighter and more fulfilled.

Which he doesn't do quite as much posting here.

Edit: Oh, yeah. Haven't chimed in.

No, it isn't okay to hate gay people as a whole because a few are obnoxious.

In fact, I'd rather just go for total social and legal equality so people would 1) Stop wrangling over this shit 2) Move on to do something more productive.

An system which has explicit and enforced inequality for people has to devote time and effort to maintaining itself against the people it oppresses.

Forget morals or democratic ideas--social and legal equality is easier to run because you don't have waste energy dealing with protests and repeated fallout and bitching.

It's like the peasant rebellions. You'd think there being a peasant uprising every twenty or thirty years would tell people something was wrong with the system if they had to devote this much energy to maintaining it.

[shadzar]

So your argument is "gay people are attention whores, they should all stop doing that because it makes me hate all gay people, but when straight people are attention whores I ignore them"?

No you still have your defense wall up to blind you to what is being said.

Ever heard the saying one bad apple could spoil the whole bunch.

What is being said is those "attention whores" are causing problems for many, be they LBGT or straight supporter thereof.

You just claimed that you never saw those attention whores to think they are a problem. I refuted that.

Whether they are in the military or not, the attention whores still affect other gays everyone, just like any attention whore for any group.

Now do you want to admit that those attention whores could be the bigger problem causing the problem to get even bigger?

MY friends that are gay/bi despise then, both the males and females.

You just have to accept that there are people that think they should bust into a room and pronounce to everyone they are gay, and constantly repeat it so nobody forgets.

Since I am likely to have to DD for a gay club this weekend, I will ask them about the attention whores and see what they say. Odds are there will be at least 3 sides:

-The attention whores themselves
-those who don't see them as a problem
-those that say as my gaming buddies do that the attention whores "give gays a bad name/rep"

You are an outlier to all of those groups, because you seem to think the attention whores just don't exist. Maybe you are blinded by hetero-hate? I don't know, and could care less. The fact is the attention whores bother MANY, and cause more problems than anyone being gay itself ever could.

Stop the attention whores, and the religious nuts have less ammo. Once the religious nuts die down, then acceptance can set in...just like what happened to D&D in the Jack Chick era and since.

[Gnosticism Is A Hoot]

Ever heard the saying one bad apple could spoil the whole bunch.

You shouldn't judge the many by the actions of a few - even assuming that these few actually exist, or that they're any worse than straight 'attention whores'.

What is being said is those "attention whores" are causing problems for many, be they LBGT or straight supporter thereof.

And those 'many' should take a long hard look at themselves and their bigoted opinions.

You just claimed that you never saw those attention whores to think they are a problem. I refuted that.

Whether they are in the military or not, the attention whores still affect other gays everyone, just like any attention whore for any group.

I have never seen anyone, ever, say 'I really hate straight people because some straight people are really militant about being straight.'

Now do you want to admit that those attention whores could be the bigger problem causing the problem to get even bigger?

The 'bigger problem' is homophobia, not exhibitionist gay people.

MY friends that are gay/bi despise then, both the males and females.

Fuck your imaginary friends. My imaginary friends are telling me that you are full of shit.

The fact is the attention whores bother MANY, and cause more problems than anyone being gay itself ever could.

Then why does no-one ever bring up those awful straight attention whores?

Stop the attention whores, and the religious nuts have less ammo. Once the religious nuts die down, then acceptance can set in...just like what happened to D&D in the Jack Chick era and since.

The answer to 'Evangelicals hate gay people' is not 'help Evangelicals pretend that gay people don't exist'.

[Wyzzard]

Stop the attention whores, and the religious nuts have less ammo. Once the religious nuts die down, then acceptance can set in...just like what happened to D&D in the Jack Chick era and since.

Well, that is certainly an interesting point of view Shad... and yet, I cannot help but feel that it is somehow not quite the most elegant solution to the problem at hand.

[Cielingcat]

Ever heard the saying one bad apple could spoil the whole bunch.

Ever heard the saying "shut the fuck up"? Because apparently you haven't.

I mean for fuck's sake, you are the goddamn textbook of anti-gay concern trolling.

Really guy. You seriously said you'd be an ally of LGBT people, except the attention whores turned you away. So go cry me a river, because you were never an ally in the first place and even if you claim to be we don't want you as one. If your requirement for opposing oppression of a group is that said group changes themselves to avoid making you unhappy, go die.

I'd support equal rights for black people, if only they stopped being gangster rappers and blah blah blah!

That's you! That's how dumb you sound! You've been wrong about every single thing you've ever done, including this thing.

[RobbyPants]

As vexing as shadzar is, is this the proper response in a thread talking about people being persecuted for their orientation?

That is, actually, quite ironic. Besides, that's what the Ignore button is for.

Mr Sinister, that was priceless. I already had a good idea what the bottom two pictures were going to be after I saw the top two.

[Starmaker]

On annoying people, from personal experience.

Two of my friends write in their public profiles that they are lesbians. But when a loser troll came around and posted a lot of offensive things ('shopped photos and the like) about them, they were really angry at being called lesbians (the neutral term, not an expletive). "I'm not a lesbian, I'm a married woman with two children!" shouted one. "Are you fucking dumb, do you think if a woman is not married by 30 she's not straight, is that what you think, idiot!?" chimed in another. (I got somewhat offended.)

There's a player on our server who's annoyingly vocal about being a lesbian. He's a guy, of course, and this is his method to be invited to a raid.

My current and previous workplaces leave no room for attention whoring due to being extremely anti-gay, but at my first workplace there was a very in-your-face young lady. She's dated several co-workers, not a girl among them.

Of course obnoxious gays and lesbians exist, because preferences in a partner's gender do not correlate with intellect. And of course the more prominent representatives of a minority group have a larger impact on the public image of that minority group. But "don't say you're gay because being recognized as a member of a group with a negative public image" is not The Solution (though it can be a forced personal life choice if the alternative is being unemployed or executed). The "Lol I'm gay" is a mass media constructed stereotype, and the mass media is profiting off homophobia and has no intention of stopping as long as it's profitable.

[Maj]

I'm going to go a little out there, maybe, in saying that it's not always specifically "gay" behavior that sets people off. I think in a lot of cases (though by no means am I saying it's all cases) there's a subconscious definition of appropriate sexual behavior, and when the line is crossed, people get uncomfortable (which translates into various outward expressions). Yes, this includes expressions of affection between homosexual individuals, but it also includes other behaviors - like breastfeeding a child (or old people having sex, or...).

Even people who can intellectually tell themselves that something is biologically perfectly normal feel discomfort in a situation that is just that far removed from the subconscious' idea of what's appropriate. I don't think that's hate.

How do you change the mental image of what's acceptable? Do you have the right to change other people's images?

[violence in the media]

I'm going to go a little out there, maybe, in saying that it's not always specifically "gay" behavior that sets people off. I think in a lot of cases (though by no means am I saying it's all cases) there's a subconscious definition of appropriate sexual behavior, and when the line is crossed, people get uncomfortable (which translates into various outward expressions). Yes, this includes expressions of affection between homosexual individuals, but it also includes other behaviors - like breastfeeding a child (or old people having sex, or...).

Even people who can intellectually tell themselves that something is biologically perfectly normal feel discomfort in a situation that is just that far removed from the subconscious' idea of what's appropriate. I don't think that's hate.

How do you change the mental image of what's acceptable? Do you have the right to change other people's images?

On the flip side to your question, do people have the responsibility to suppress, or at least acknowledge, unreasonable or irrational feelings?

[cthulhu]

acknowleging is fine, but it's impossible to supress. I have an irrational fear of heights, I know it is irrational, but that doesn't stop my heart rate hiting 190 and my body dumping a load of adrenaline into my body if I try to go, say, abseiling.

[violence in the media]

acknowleging is fine, but it's impossible to supress. I have an irrational fear of heights, I know it is irrational, but that doesn't stop my heart rate hiting 190 and my body dumping a load of adrenaline into my body if I try to go, say, abseiling.

But do you have an irrational physical response like that when confronted with teh gays? Is this the basis of Gay-dar?

[Kaelik]

1) I share an irrational fear of heights. I still force myself to stand near drops when it is necessary, and force myself to ignore my panic.

2) Regarding the stupidity of "Do you have the right to change other people's images?" Yes, of course we do. We get to tell them to change it, we get to tell them they can't act on it, and we get to tell them to suck it up and deal with it, just like we do racists.

[Maj]

On the flip side to your question, do people have the responsibility to suppress, or at least acknowledge, unreasonable or irrational feelings?

I think they do have the responsibility to acknowledge unreasonable feelings, but I don't know that I would say they have the responsibility to suppress them. That's starting to walk the line between freedom of speech and a lack thereof, and I'm not really ready to go there.

I mentioned in my post that there are people who may intellectually acknowledge that something makes them uncomfortable, but that acknowledgement doesn't mean the discomfort goes away. Nor do I think that discomfort is automatically classifiable as hatred.

Is this the basis of Gay-dar?

I've never been under the impression that gaydar is related towards fear, hate, or anything like that.

[violence in the media]

Is this the basis of Gay-dar?

I've never been under the impression that gaydar is related towards fear, hate, or anything like that.

Sorry, I didn't mean to give that impression. I was being flip at the idea that bigots have similar autonomic responses to stimuli that phobics do. Even if they were somehow allergic to gay people, the appropriate response is to take some fucking Zyrtec.

Also, "ibid"?

I think they do have the responsibility to acknowledge unreasonable feelings, but I don't know that I would say they have the responsibility to suppress them. That's starting to walk the line between freedom of speech and a lack thereof, and I'm not really ready to go there.

Wait, so you're saying that a person does not have an obligation to suppress feelings, or the behaviors that flow from them, even if they know that those feelings are unreasonable, irrational, harmful, or generally detrimental?

Freedom of Speech means, to you, that someone shouldn't say to themselves, "Goddamn, I'm an unreasonable asshole! I really need to try and keep that shit in check and be less of a jerk."?

[Kaelik]

Wait, so you're saying that a person does not have an obligation to suppress feelings, or the behaviors that flow from them, even if they know that those feelings are unreasonable, irrational, harmful, or generally detrimental?

Freedom of Speech means, to you, that someone shouldn't say to themselves, "Goddamn, I'm an unreasonable asshole! I really need to try and keep that shit in check and be less of a jerk."?

Yeah, I'm generally fucking confused at how freedom of speech means that people who realize they are full of shit should never stop being full of shit.

But she's mormon right? That would explain it, since anyone with half a brain knows that mormons are full of shit, and most mormons have half a brain at least, so she wouldn't want her entire religion to disappear overnight.

[Neeeek]

On annoying people, from personal experience.

Two of my friends write in their public profiles that they are lesbians. But when a loser troll came around and posted a lot of offensive things ('shopped photos and the like) about them, they were really angry at being called lesbians (the neutral term, not an expletive).

I have (openly) gay female friends who don't like the word "lesbian". From what I gather it's half the word itself produces unpleasant ocular impressions and half a dislike of the general stereotype the word engenders.